Pembina Institute suggests shifting more Calgary freight to…bicycle?
A new report from the Pembina Institute studied the opportunity to shift more last-mile delivery to electric bike, tapping into a trend dubbed cyclelogistics.
The report notes between 2019 and 2025 there’s been a surge in online sales, which combined with ongoing urbanization is leading to city streets that are more crowded with delivery trucks.
The report focused on Calgary, where truck traffic has increased more than 55% from 1996 and 2021, according to the institute.
“Cities are increasingly looking to sustainable delivery methods. One emerging solution is cyclelogistics — using bicycles, tricycles and multi-wheeled cycles to transport goods,” the report indicated.
“By shifting even a small portion of deliveries from trucks to bikes, cities can reduce the distance travelled by trucks and vans, along with associated emissions, congestion and other urban freight impacts. Cargo e-bikes also offer operational advantages, including flexible parking and the ability to bypass traffic. Currently, cargo e-bike delivery is not widely adopted in Calgary. Realizing its potential requires supportive policies, infrastructure and business models.”
The report interviewed stakeholders in the logistics space who identified financial barriers and available infrastructure as a concern. Most, according to the institute, were willing to incorporate e-bikes into their operations, though they said they have limited awareness of their potential or how to integrate them into business operations.
Calgary’s geography and climate were also identified as barriers.
“Using these insights, we developed a market assessment tool to estimate the potential for cargo e-bike deliveries in Calgary,” the Pembina Institute said. “Our analysis suggests that between 1% and 4% of motorized urban freight trips could be shifted to cargo bikes. Replacing just 1-4% of freight traffic with cargo bikes could reduce between 0.15 and 0.62 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year.”
The report can be accessed here.
Have your say
This is a moderated forum. Comments will no longer be published unless they are accompanied by a first and last name and a verifiable email address. (Today's Trucking will not publish or share the email address.) Profane language and content deemed to be libelous, racist, or threatening in nature will not be published under any circumstances.
“Calgary’s geography and climate were also identified as barriers.”
I wonder how many PHDs it took to figure that out ?!?!?!
That’s like saying we could walk on the ocean floor … if it wasn’t for all that damned water !!!
A few key realities:
Funding dependence: Their operating base is heavily dependent on grants, foundations, and government programs. When federal priorities lean green, they thrive. When those priorities shift, they scramble. That fuels the perception that their “initiatives” are more about securing funding cycles than delivering practical, scalable results.
Policy over practicality: Pembina excels at producing glossy reports, models, and position papers. But the criticism—fairly common in industry—is that they don’t build or operate energy infrastructure. They advocate from the sidelines. That disconnect makes their proposals feel unrealistic, especially to people actually running fleets, pipelines, or power systems.
Political positioning: They position themselves as the “evidence-based voice” pushing Ottawa toward climate policies. But many critics argue that their “evidence” is selectively framed to match ideological goals, not a balanced economic or technical assessment.
Track record: While they’ve had some influence on regulations (e.g., carbon pricing, coal phase-out), those wins are largely policy-level mandates, not hands-on deployments that demonstrate scalability in the real world.
(Source: ChatGPT)
It does beg the question though as to why a publication like Trucknews would give any credence at all to what the Pembina Institute has to say?
E bike or e trike like used in Cuba or other warmer countries are a very bad idea for Alberta. With plenty of oil and natural gas . The costs of labor housing medical services make a wheel vehicle much cheaper. When India and some other countries can still buy new 3 tier motors why not make better use of expensive labor because in Canada if a person makes under $25 hr the net cost of medical services housing and other gov services are more than the taxes they pay to gov.
This would apply to any major city in Canada, would it not?
Why would they single out Calgary?
Yes, we can replace numerous vehicles (whether commuter, delivery, emergency services, etc.) with human or other powered options during the summer months, but when conditions deteriorate, we are right back to requiring trucks, vans, and cars to get around. So each fleet would then require a summer and winter fleet, increasing costs significantly. That’s just what we need, more expensive goods that account for increased costs of the fleets that deliver them. Good thinking Pembina. Oh, and because of the reduced speed and range of these “cycles”, we would require a five or ten fold increase in vehicles and operators. This just gets better and better, with more thought.
There are some really cool looking electric powered delivery “cycles” out there, and I even considered starting a business based on using them, but when you can only service the customer for a fraction of the year, they probably aren’t going to stick with you as a provider. I remember an article on trucknews.com, not that long ago, stating that customers were no longer willing to pay increase rates for the ability to say that they were utilizing “green” transport options. So that doesn’t seem like a viable differentiator to rush out and spend a bunch of money on the alternative.
God will the idiots on this flipping green kick get off there high horse, get off it my god they just cant quit and it all about money mostly taxpayers .
Get over and quit trying to endoceratid every one especially the kids cause all ya do is scare them